Integrated Farming System (IFS) is a sustainable agricultural approach that improves productivity and reduces costs through effective recycling and reuse of resources. In IFS, different farm enterprises like crops, livestock, and fisheries interact synergistically by using the waste of one component as input for another. This reduces costs and improves production and income while maintaining ecological sustainability. The objectives of IFS include improving farmer livelihoods, reducing external inputs, providing year-round employment and income, enhancing biodiversity, and sustaining soil health and productivity through efficient recycling of farm waste and minimizing nutrient losses. IFS presents an alternative to conventional farming that is better for both the environment and long-term economic viability of small-scale farmers.

1. Integrated Farming System
and
Sustainable Agriculture
Speaker:-
Shaheen Praveen
Deptt. of SS&AC
COA, IGKV, Raipur
Declining Production
Declining Bio-diversity
Declining Resources quality

3. Hierarchy of Agricultural Systems

4. Integrated Farming System
• Integrated Farming System (IFS) is a reliable way of obtaining
high productivity with substantial nutrient economy in
combination with maximum compatibility and replenishment of
organic matter by way of effective recycling of organic
residues/wastes.
• In this system, an interrelated set of enterprises is used so that
the “waste” from one component becomes an input for another
part of the system, which reduces cost and improves production
and/or income.
• IFS works as a system of systems (Chan, 2006).
Integrated agricultural systems have
multiple enterprises that interact in space
and time, resulting in a synergistic resource
transfer among enterprises.

5. Principles of IFS
1. Cyclic
Farming system is essential cyclic. Therefore management
decisions related to one component may affect the others.
2. Rational
Rational use of farm resources is major route to get over
poverty.
For resource poor farmers the correct management of crop
residues, together with an optimal allocation of scarce
resources, leads to sustainable production.
3. Ecological Sustainability
Combining ecological sustainability and economic viability,
integrated farming system maintains and improves
agricultural productivity while also reducing negative
environmental impacts.

6. Objectives of IFS
 Improve the standard of living of farmers
 Reduce the external input usage on farm (LEISA)
 Increasing the employment opportunities and
maintaining throughout the year
 Regular cash flow throughout the year
 Enhancing the biodiversity
 Sustaining the productivity and soil health
 Increasing the total farm income as whole
Waste Valuable product

7. Ways of
Achieving
Aims of
IFS
Efficient
recycling of
farm and
animal waste
Minimizing
the nutrient
losses Maximizing
the nutrient
use
efficiency
Complementary
combination of
farm enterprises
Following
efficient
cropping
system and
crop rotation

9. Determinant Factors for IFS
Adoption In an Area

10. Why We are Looking Ahead for IFS
• To mitigate the residual effects of Green Revolution.
• To reduce dependency on inorganic fertilizers/ off-
farm inputs and to combate their residual adverse
effects on resources (soils, ground-water, ambient air,
bio-magnification in living organism).
• To efficiently utilize on-farm wastes as inputs.
• To reduce input-cost pressure on farmers.
• To enhance the B: C ratio.
• To bring sustainability in agriculture

12. Challenges to IFS

15. IFS Model for Irrigated Upland
(1.0 acre)

16. Crop- Fishery-Livestock Integrated
Farming System

17. Agri-Silvi-Fishery Integrated Farming
System

18. Possible IFS

19. Advantages of IFS

21. IFS Vs. Organic Farming
IFS
 Maintain and enhance the
production
 Optimum utilization of
available resources
 Able to produce food for
meeting the requirement of
growing population
 Environmentally safe,
economically viable, Socially
justified.
Organic Farming
 Less production in comparison
to IFS
 Fully dependent on organic
sources
 Can not be fully dependent on
it as it has less production rate
 Environmentally safe,
optimally economically viable
on long term duration but not
popularly acceptable.

22. IFS Vs. Traditional Farming
IFS
 Maintain the potentialities of
available resources
 Similar or higher production
rate with high profitability.
 75 % Organic + 25 %
inorganic resource integration
 Maintains the biodiversity
 No adverse residual effect of
inputs utilized
 Environmentally sound and
economically viable
Traditional Farming
 Slow degradation of available
resources
 Low profitability per unit input
applied
 100 % inorganic resource
utilization
 Degradation of biodiversity
 Adverse residual effect of
inorganic inputs
 Environmentally unsafe and
economically not much sound.

23. Case Study
(IFS Vs. Conventional Farming)
 40 ha land
 25 small and marginal
farmers
 Belagera village, Yadgir
local RSK, Karnataka,
2014.
(Jaishankar N, B. S. Janagoudar,
Basavaraj Kalmath, Vasudev Palthe
Naik, and Siddayya S. 2014.
Integrated Farming for Sustainable
Agriculture and Livelihood Security
to Rural Poor).

24. Sustainable Agriculture

25. Sustainable Agriculture
• Sustainable agriculture is farming in sustainable ways
(meeting society's food and textile needs in the present
without compromising the ability of future generations
to meet their own needs) based on an understanding
of ecosystem services, the study of relationships
between organisms and their environment.
• It is a long-term methodological structure that
incorporates profit, environmental stewardship,
fairness, health, business and familial aspects on a farm
setting.
• It is defined by 3 integral aspects which are:
1. Economic profit,
2. Environmental stewardship and
3. Social responsibility.

26. Continued...
• Sustainability focuses on the business process and
practice of a farm in general, rather than a specific
agricultural product.
• The integrated economic, environmental, and
social principles are incorporated into a “triple
bottom line” (TBL); when the general impacts of
the farm are assessed. Unlike a traditional
approach where the profit-margin is the single
major factor; Agriculture sustainability is also
involved with the social and environmental
factors

27. Basic Principles of Sustainable Agriculture
1. The incorporation of biological and ecological
processes into agricultural and food production
practices. For example, these processes could
include nutrient cycling, soil regeneration,
and nitrogen fixation.
2. Using decreased amounts of non-renewable and
unsustainable inputs, particularly the ones that
are environmentally harmful.
3. Using the expertise of farmers to both
productively work the land as well as to
promote the self-reliance and self-sufficiency of
farmers.
4. Solving agricultural and natural resource
problems through the cooperation and
collaboration of people with different skills. The
problems tackled include pest management
and irrigation.

28. Environ-
mentally
Sound

29. Components of Sustainable
Agriculture

30. Integrated Water Management

36. Goals
of
Sustainable Agriculture

43. IFS – An Ecofriendly Approach to
Sustainable Agriculture
Sustainable development in agriculture must include integrated farming
system (IFS):-
 With efficient soil, water crop and pest management practices, which
are environmentally friendly and cost effective.
 In IFS, the waste of one enterprise becomes the input of another for
making better use of resources.
 In integrated crop livestock farming system, crop residues can be used
for animal feed, while manure from livestock can enhance agricultural
productivity.
 IFS also play an important role in improving the soil health by
increasing the nitrogen, phosphorous, organic carbon and microbial
count of soil and thus, reduces the use of chemical fertilizers.
 Moreover, IFS components are known to control the weed and
regarded as an important element of integrated pest management and
thus minimizes the use of weed killers as well as pesticides and thus
protects the environment.
 The water use efficiency and water quality of IFS was better than
conventional system.

44. References
Jaishankar N, B. S.Janagoudar, Basavaraj Kalmath, Vasudev Palthe Naik, and Siddayya S. 2014.
Integrated Farming for Sustainable Agriculture and Livelihood Security to Rural Poor, Int'l
Conference on Chemical, Biological, and Environmental Sciences (ICCBES’14) May 12-13,
2014, Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia).
FAOSTAT data. 2005. Available at Web site http://faostat. fao.org/faostat/form
collection=Population (updated March 2005).
Ruttan, V.W. 1999. The transition to agricultural sustainability. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 96:5960–5967.
Trewavas, A. 2002. Malthus foiled again and again. Nature 418:668–670.
Huang, J., Pray, C., and Rozelle, S. 2002. Enhancing the drops to feed the poor. Nature 418:678–
684.
Brummer, E.C. 1998. Diversity, stability and sustainable American agriculture. Agronomy
Journal 90:1–2.
Tilman, D., Cassman, K.G., Matson, P.A., Naylor, R., and Polasky, S. 2002. Agricultural
sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature 418:671–677.
Krall, J.M. and Schuman, G.E. 1996. Integrated dryland crop and livestock production systems
on the Great Plains: extent and outlook. Journal of Production Agriculture 9:187–191.
Heitschmidt, R.K., Short, R.E., and Grings, E.E. 1996. Ecosystems, sustainability, and animal
agriculture. Journal of Animal Science 74:1395–1405.
Roberts, M.J., Osteen, C., and Soule, M. 2004. Risk, Government Programs, and the
Environment. United States Department of Agriculture–Economic Research Service,
Technical Bulletin No. 1908. United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.

45. Thank You